Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'blue water navy'.
Found 3 results
GBArmy posted a question in VA Disability Compensation Benefits Claims Research ForumThe Supreme Court of the United States just issued a 30-day extension to Department of Justice (DOJ) officials who are contemplating an appeal of a lower court ruling (Procopia v Wilkie). In January, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington D.C. in 9-2 decision, extended presumptive VA disability benefits to the so-called Blue Water Navy veterans who served off the coast of Vietnam and who were exposed to toxic chemical defoliants during the Vietnam conflict. Now this little slight of hand is AFTER the VA Secretary said he didn't want to recommend any more delays. Am I getting totally negative, but we thought that the Vietnam Navy guys were going to get their coverage finally, and they did is. How come it really isn't in the news?
I just got an email from Chris Attig, and the importance of this upcoming case. Its about the "Pro Veteran Canon" vs "Chevron Deference". As some of you know, the Supreme Court Case of "Chevron" gave govenment agencies wide lattitude in interpreting their own rules. Of course, many of. you know about "Benefit of the doubt", where the tie goes to the Veteran. This upcoming case could be good for Veterans, especially Blue Water Vets This case will be important to Vets, no matter what, because its being decided "En Banc". This means the outcome will be precedential. Vets are represented by none other than Ken Carpenter, probably the best of the best. https://www.attigsteel.com/podcast/federal-circuit-oral-argument/procopio-pro-veterans-canon-chevron-en-banc/
I ran across this interesting website. It contains quite a lot of great information but, for Blue Water Sailors, you can track any typhoons you ran through in a given year. Obviously, the storms of interest would be the ones that traveled into and through Vietnam. There's no doubt the sea and seabed would have been heavily roiled and any dioxin laden material would have been suspended in the water for quite a long time and who knows how far it would have traveled. I wish I'd seen this site while my claim was still at the VARO, or at least, the BVA. It would certainly add ammunition to go with the RAN study and the ensuing IOM confirmation of that RAN study. There were, for instance, 26 in '70, 36 in '71 and 31 in '72, the years I spent full tours. My short stint over there in '73 had none in the 45 days I was there.